Afraid To Discuss Evolution

TLDR: On February 5, 2005, The New York Times published the editorial “Afraid to Discuss Evolution,” which argued there is “ample evidence that even when evolution is theoretically part of the curriculum, it is often ignored or played down in the classroom.

Abstract: P can try to settle intellectual debates in several ways, chief among them raising their voices higher or countering their opponents with statistical arguments. The second strategy is surely better, but only if the statistics are sound. Unfortunately, when it comes to the current debate about teaching “creation science” and “intelligent design” in the public schools, misleading statistics are front and center. On February 5, 2005, The New York Times published the editorial “Afraid to Discuss Evolution,” which argued there is “ample evidence that even when evolution is theoretically part of the curriculum, it is often ignored or played down in the classroom.” To bolster its position, the Times cited a “1998 doctoral dissertation [,which] found that 24 percent of the biology teachers sampled in Louisiana said that creationism had a scientific foundation and that 17 percent were not sure.” I found these statistics mind-boggling. Could 41% of the biology teachers in Louisiana really reject evolution? The evidence came from a relatively recent dissertation, so perhaps its findings reflected current-day beliefs. Yet I wanted to know more. Who conducted the study? Did the doctoral candidate have a particular perspective on this usually partisan debate and, if so, was this communicated—inadvertently or directly—to the respondents? Was the sample representative? Was the sample size adequate? Was the response rate high? Every newspaper reader should ask questions like these when evaluating scientific evidence, whatever an article’s thesis. So, too, should newspaper writers and editorial boards, including those at The New York Times.